Monday, September 14, 2015

What is past is prologue

David Warren notes the press pushing emotional issues rather then not that most of the so called refugees are not families fleeing war, but young men and mostly those who were living quietly but poorly in Turkish or other refugee camps.

If much of the pushback against the refugees is in Eastern Europe, maybe it's because many of these people suffered from Turkish aggression. Seige of Vienna anyone?

In that one, it was the Polish who did the crowning blow to stop the Turks, but almost no news reports tell of the decimation of the Balkans or Hungary from the Turks, or that locals remember their ancestor's suffering.

I remember when the elites lamented the destruction of the famous Muslim bridge in Mostar: But locals hated the bridge, because the Turks would hang people from the bridge, including priests who wouldn't convert.

But the Turks weren't the first:

Medievalnet has a link about Edward I of England and the Mongol connection.

At the outset, England acted “normally,” as an enemy of the Mongols. In 1241 Pope Gregory IX appealed to Henry III to take up arms against the Tartars plundering Hungary. Gregory agreed to transfer the crusading vows already taken against the Muslims to an enterprise against the Mongols. The crown of England was one of the first to respond positively; when the pope proclaimed a crusade in Eastern Europe in 1253, King Henry and Prince Edward assumed the Cross and enrolled to fight in Hungary. Although Henry III fixed a schedule for his departure (for 1256), due to the negotium Siciliae he did not fulfill his oath. Thus, after the 1259 assault of the Golden Horde, Prince Edward himself was urged to come to the aid of Hungary, as Khan Berke envisaged a great assault against Western Europe. The pope also asked Richard of Cornwall to engage in the defense of the eastern boundaries of Christendom.

Strategypage notes how India is worried at Chinese's slow war of aggression, and that the liberals in the state department won't help the Philippines for fear of upsetting China

Freakonomics reports that teaching boys at risk to react peacefully instead of causing fights will cut down on fights.
Part of the discussion is the lack of men to teach the boys how to be mature men.

well yes. And again much of it is about the bread and circus distractions and how the propaganda in the media is a big part of this.

but if you dare to point out how traditional ethics actually is based on human experience, not utopian talking points, you are sexist, racist and homophobic, or interpreted as political spin (i.e "theocracy" danger).